Does Philosophy Need to Know Its History?

The point of doing the history of philosophy is to confront that which is completely foreign to us and seems unassimilable, in the hope of thereby getting some distance from our own form of life, and of learning to treat what is alien on its own terms. This is more difficult to do than might first seem to be the case, because of our almost irresistable tendency to assimilate that which is radically different to that which seems familiar to us. In history, one of the major forms this takes is anachronism. How can one avoid making them-then too much like us-now? The motivation for doing the history of philosophy is, therefore, basically ethical and political. In a society characterised by the division of labour, it is perfectly permissible for individual philosophers to pursue different goals, and deploy different parts of the huge corpus of knowledge which we have at our disposal. There is no need for each individual philosopher to integrate the study of the history of philosophy into each of their individual projects. The essay leaves it to the judgment of the reader to decide to what extent the active, sympathetic engagement with the alien is an ethical and political goal which is desirable — perhaps even so desirable as to count as a demand. In any case, this is a demand on the institution, not on individuals. Even if one thought that it was highly advisable that the history of philosophy form an integral part of the discipline of philosophy, it is hard to see this as a “necessity”.